Contents

Nomination + Support. The Thinker has had one hell of a year writing articles; he's got a number 17 on the Hall of Shame, but if you counted all the collaborations and rewritings he's done in full, that number balloons to a full 20. Not to mention that he's the man with the most articles in the Top3, including but not limited to Mr. Kearsy, Folgers Crystals, Drunk Olympics, and the most highly favored article on VFH to date, Why?:Pour Boiling Hot Water Down Your Trousers?. His features aren't all he's got, though, as he's spent a lot of his writing on the site THINKERING less fortunate articles rather than just starting from scratch, and these rewrites and collaborations are only second in quantity to One Eyed Jack, and likely the best in quality the whole wiki over. In short, it's a real tough call to make, but Thinker just about edges out the competition in my book, and since I didn't get to vote for him on WotM, I'll give him my vote here. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Big Support. THINKER is my favorite writer on this site (even more than myself). Many of his articles are my personal favorites. I log on to Uncyc looking forward any new articles he might have. I believe that he deserves it the most. •••Necropaxx(T){~} 06:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For. Whether it be his own originals, collaborations, or THINKERing the hell out of other people's stuff, he contributes brilliant stuff consistently. This is a really tough call given the quality of the noms, and I wouldn't complain if any of these guys won, but THINKER deserves it most in my book. --SirUnderUser(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 13:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm too hungover to write things. THINKER is the best writer on the site. Give him this. The end. -RAHB 20:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination. TLB started out the year as a bit of a noob, but as time progressed his talent in writing became exponentially more obvious. He's composed two of the funniest articles I've ever read, Volcano and Heat death of the universe, and another whopping 13 features to boot. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For Led knows what's going on. I haven't graduated from his adoption program yet, but I can tell you that he actually knows what "funny" is. I have had close experience writing with him (see Heat death of the universe), and he is not only a funny writer, but is someone who can explain why what they write is funny. I think that is the essence of someone who is the best writer of the year, out of some 60,000 registered users. Le Cejak•<->(Jan 1) 00:29

For. as per woah, what cajek said. Also, he's great on ?pedia too. Also, wut? Also,User:Fag/sig

Nomination. Ljlego's got it all: quality, quantity, and cajones. He's got the highest article-to-feature ratio on the site and a total feature count of 22.5, a number rivaled only by the legendary Savethemooses. Plus, he's from Long Island. Who could forget such articles as Nazi, HowTo:Be a Gangsta, the iconic Chuck Norris, and my personal favorite Mad TV. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For I've watched this Uncyclopedian grow from a young youngster to a youngster (sniff) and I'm so proud of the work that Ljlego contributes, and the ongoing quality apparent in it. Many of the other nominees are real Hall of Fame members, Ljlego should be the next to join you. DameGUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 18:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For. This was extremely close between him and Modus. Extremely close. I mean, I actually went back and forth, editing Lj and then MO's sections, drafting witty vote after witty vote and then changing my mind and having to write more witty votes for the other candidate. Then I played Tetris for about an hour. But after that it became clear that the best choice was Ljlego. He's hilarious, and he's got a boatload of features. I mean, Jesus, 22.5 features. I don't know if that's skill or luck or whoring or what, but whatever it is it's pretty goddamned impressive if you ask me. So yeah. Ljlego's cool and should win whatever award this is. --§.|WotM|PLS|T|C|A 03:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

For - I like statistics. I like funnies. I like Ljlego. — SirManticore 12:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

N+F This has been MO's year, from an unknown Canadian to that pompous parade of odd letters you see trailing his signature. In my opinion, one of the most talented writers we have around, who makes not only top notch articles but also makes every conversation with him an "exciting" experience. Modus is my choice for the year, he deserves it, that handsome bastard. ~ Mordillo where is my DAMN IT? 07:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For...I'm glad we have so many great writers to choose from, but I can only vote for one--SirShandon (Talk) (Trophy Room) 13:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Whereas I cannot morally vote for a loose whore like Ljlego, I'm torn between so many of these other writers, so I have to say that this is a really tough decision for me. However, I must vote for MO because he's an excellent writer, Uncyclopedia's lead commentator on the Village Dump, and because I fucked his father in the ass. There's a video out on the internet about it. It's called something like "mrhands.mpg". Anyways, For. --Hotadmin4u69[TALK] 20:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Dig. I'm not going to delve into a long tirade on why I love So So's work, or why I believe he deserves this award. Let me just say that, of the people that I personally believe to have an innate command of comedic functions (especially subtlety), his name tops the list. And to me, that command is one of the highest benchmarks a humorist can attain. Everyone nominated here is already a champion. So So gets my vote. --THINKER 21:57, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment It kills me not to vote for my favorite Uncyc writer ever, but that's just how it goes. I'll always love you! --§.|WotM|PLS|T|C|A 01:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

For He's sung, but not sung enough. Far not enough. ADDENDUM: I realize now that my reason sucks like a monkey on a popsicle, so read this part too. Mhaille is far more than a writer like me, who puts many articles out. He is far more than Modusoperandi, who puts out many good articles, and will occasionally help a brother out. He is far more than a writer even like Thinker, a man who I greatly respect and admire, who will reshape an article to better suit the high-quality standard we like to pretend to uphold. No, Mhaille is more than that. Mhaille is an always-brilliant satirist who takes his adaptable tone and will subtly apply it to others' work, also giving the authors tips and tricks of the trade. A true maker of featured articles whose count is far higher than mine and STM's combined when you count the uncredited features he helped build, he deserves this, and it's a pity he doesn't seem to be getting it. As the author of the article which inspired me to start here, Mhaille will always be #1 for me.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 03:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

For. This year is fucking hard. I mean, I'm not nominated, which would probably make this vote even more of a close race in my heart, but this is still pretty damn hard. That said, Mhaille is the best, and always will be the best. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 02:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

For - Yes, it's extremely late, but I had to give it a lot of thought. I was leaning towards Thinkerer, but to me more memorable articles were written by Mhaille. Some of my favorites include Oscar Wilde, Goa Tse, Hannah Montana (and some other Nazi stuff I liked), Shot your fuck up, Schrödinger's cat, etc. Not to mention he can come up with gold in a matter of minutes. Though I hate Noel Coward quotes with a passion, Mhaille's got my vote. --Kip>Talk•Works••14:33, Jan. 14, 2008

Nomination, but withholding my vote 'til a bit later. There are so many people I wanted to nom for this, and TKF is definitely one of them. His talents stretch to all areas of work in the site, from welcoming new users to huffing and ICUing in Newpages. He even has time to write some amazingfantasticarticles. His sysopping has only made him an even more helpful contributor, and I hope he continues as one of the most reasonable admins around. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)00:56, Jan 1

For TKF has been around since time immemorial. He's been an admin since November. Trust in Frog. Le Cejak•<->(Jan 1) 01:24

Erm, he has been admin since December. I know, I was in his inauguration. He wore light green robe with a very big cleavage. I know, it seemed strange to me as well at the time. ~ Mordillo where is my DAMN IT? 09:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For A tough decision, and yet I am very clear on who I think deserves it the most. -RAHB 02:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment! Everyone who voted for me should read this! I'm hereby throwing my base behind Algorithm, so if you love me more than the other guys, it's time for you guys to suddenly love Algo more than me. VOTE/EAT ALGO! --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination and a BIG For. What can be said about MadMax? Probably very little actually, for a guy who quietly goes about the business of cleaning up all the crap on Uncyclopedia. For the guy who should have been made a sysop at least a year before he was. For the guy who is a one man army, organising, deleting cruft, he never sleeps. One of the few contributors that you can almost guarantee will have edited something on most articles on this site. Step forward, MadMax! -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me)

For No offense to the other nominees, of course, but I'm inclined to say that anybody not voting for MadMax has simply failed to notice all the work he actually does, and not just in 2007 (although he fully deserves the award for this year alone). In honor of his long, long history at Uncyc, unmatched in length and efficiency, Max had better win or I'm machete-ing somebody's dog or small child. —rc(t) 06:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For. Although all of the nominees are extremely worthy, the sheer volume of work MadMax does is phenomenal, and deserves full recognition. --SirUnderUser(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination, but withholding my vote 'til a bit later. OEJ is a little bit inactive in the past couple weeks, but that doesn't change the fact that he has done some great stuff for the site. I know he's done a bunch of great stuff in VFD, but I mostly know him as a pee reviewer. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that he invented the real review, the one that's actually helpful, and ushered in an age of extremelyhelpfulreviewers. He has also written more articles about more things than I've ever seen. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)01:13, Jan 1

For per LedBalloon. I remember the olden times, when putting an article on Pee Review basically meant you were waiting for OEJ to look it over for you. Now that the tradition is distributed a tiny bit more evenly, we can finally acknowledge his amazingness. --The AcceptableCainad(Fnord) 21:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination and For. There are people like MadMax who do lots of little work around the site. Then there are people like myself, who do more noticeable stuff in bulk. Then there are people like Algorithm, who keep the site functioning. If not for Algorithm, we'd likely be stuck in 2005, and probably not even exist. He's done more background work and tinkled around in Uncyclopedia's circuit board more than any other user for the past three years; it's a total shame that he's without this award so far. Algo is a vital cornerstone of the site, and a damned great dog food, too. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 01:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment I agree with everything TKF said. Algo has contributed the Forum system, the <choose> extension and numerous other bits of now-used-everywhere Uncyc tech. I stand by my vote for MadMax, but if you must vote for someone else, make it Algorithm or else I'll piano-wire your wife or husband. —rc(t) 06:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

DIG Algo is my hero, and one helluva guy. Almost like Yanni. He kept this asshole around when I was very close to leaving. I hope Max wins too, because he certainly deserves it, but Algo is just quality people and the ratchet that keeps this place running like a well-oiled topless wrestler machine. --THINKER 16:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

4: Al is one of the great unsung heroes of Uncyclopedia and until his song gets sung, I'll keep pushing to make that happen. --Sirgwax (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Strong For I want to start off by saying that this was one of the hardest choices I've had to make, and that all of these people would probably make a better president than any of the nominees. That said, Algo is, as TKF said, among the most hardworking, helpful, and all-around good guys of the site. We have him to thank for the wonderful new VFP system (which has sadly gone unnoticed, if one takes the quality of nominations into account), those things that rcmurphy mentioned, and being the only active admin on the site for the better part of this summer. When louder and more noticeable admins were contributing to the forum madness instead of doing their duties, Algo quietly took over, banning blankers, featuring articles, and moving this site along at a clip that never seemed to miss a beat. Without MadMax, we would have several more uncategorized pages, several fewer redirects, and a volume of edits that, now that we have them, is seemingly indispensable. Without TKF, we would be less several hilarious pages, thousands of unreverted vandalizations, and an all-around good user. Without One-Eyed Jack, Pee Review would be a festering hole of unloved crap, much of which is a chore to read. Without RDB, we'd see a lot less recent changes. Without Zombiebaron, we'd have a lot of trouble moving forward. But where everyone on this page is a recent-changes monster and revert-o-matic, Algorithm offers something more, something that puts him a cut above the rest. And that's why he gets my vote.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 02:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Lj said it all. TKF is my close 2nd choice, but I had no idea of all the things that Algo did behind the scenes before this award; I've taken so much of it for granted. So yeah. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)02:37, Jan 7

For Did I say I was very clear before? Oh, that was a lie. Yes, everybody here deserves this, though Lj seemed to say everything best. Algo FTW. -RAHB 00:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

For, a scholar and a gentleman. Plus, he's good with the codeystuff. And no, not just Codeine's stuff. Other codeystuff too. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 02:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination, but withholding my vote 'til a bit later. All over the site, from RecentChanges to Special:Random, RDB finds crap that has festered on otherwise-decent articles. He then purges that crap. For this reason, he is more than qualified to be up for this award. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)01:22, Jan 1

Comment Unfortunately, it seems that there are so very many unsung heroes of Uncyclopedia. RDB is another one of these greats. His horn isn't being tooted quite so much as the rest of these candidates, but it deserves some. Toot toot. I'm tired, let's get some pork or something.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 04:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination As Led, I'm holding off on voting. And for fun, I'm making things even more difficult when it comes to choices. Like it or not, Zombiebaron has been integral to this site that we love so much as this past year has gone on. Whether it be banning the 'tards that most people don't have the balls to ban, or being one of the two or three active admins on the site come August/September (and probably the most efficient of them), ZB has fully marked himself deserving of this award. Sure, he may be a little bit abrasive at times, but just like Famine before him, without Zombiebaron, we wouldn't be nothing.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 18:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment You used a double negative in that last sentence, Lj. I guess what you mean is that Zombiebaron is the root of all our problems.--PhlegmLeoispotter*(garble! jank!) 02:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomfur Look man. He deserved it last month. He still deserves it. And as is the nature of all deserving winners, he won't win it for another two months. Alas, I begin my epic struggle to bring this award to probably one of the top 3 writers on Uncyclopedia. Viva La THE. -RAHB 02:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

With his guarantee thing, he wrote what I think is somewhere around 15 or so quality articles this month, a few of which of which were featured. A few more were quasi-featured, as Mr Cheevers has had some horrible luck on VFH. He is definitely deserving of some recognition for all his great articles. Nom & For. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)00:34, Jan 2

For - Now seems like the ideal time for Mr. Cheevers to win the award. Plenty of good articles in the last few months. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 02:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

For - seems to be going in the correct direction. He's asked me questions as well as others and wrote a good first article--Æ 01:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

For As an eligible n00b (which always helps when running for n00by of the month), and a fine n00b at that, young Anakin has won my vote. --THE 20:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Dig THINKER graduates another success. You're welcome Uncyclopedia! (Also, came for help, stuck with his work, and integrated advice into the piece very well -- couldn't ask for more from a newbie) --THINKER 20:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Fag's going to reach consensus, so let's vote for DJ. First of all, he's on his way to a feature. Second of all, he is NOT a character on Full House. Vote for DJ! Le Cejak•<->Jan 11 (14:53)

My bad, he's a friend of Moneke, and collaborated with him. Still isn't eliglbe--Æ 18:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

He is NOT ineligible, AE. He is under 30 days of age! Le Cejak•<->Jan 11 (18:17)

He needs a full article and he doesn't have one yet. Collaborations with other users don't count as full articles.--Æ 18:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Have written at least one "full" article. - that says nothing about collaborations, one way or the other. Me thinks eligible. -RAHB 02:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

According to his userpage, he's got two collabs, which should together count as a full article. Eh? Ligible? --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 02:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

For Rather than be bitter, I'm gonna give this to someone who also deserves it. User:Fag/sig

For. I've seen him around quite a bit, voting onstuff, picking up bad stuff to re-write, generally making loads of contributions and stuff (although some more judicious use of the preview button could be in order!) and generally doing good, helpful stuff. Anakin's contributed a good article, which is fine, but this guy's done loads! --SirUnderUser(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 10:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

For I've seen him doing some good stuff around here. - UnIdiot | Talk?|Theme - 16:28, Jan 20

Nom and For Fag's done a lot of work here for being only less than a month old (please god, say that he's not a month old) Le Cejak•<->Jan 7 (14:16)

Comment I'm pretty sure that I'm less than a month old here... but if not, may I remind you of my persistent arguing? I've spoke to many people about my belief that the limit for NotM should be bigger because people who join later in the month, expecially in the later half of the month will not win as in their time they will find people cannot win towards the end of the month due to nominations already having been long underway, and will not be able to win next month's as they will not have been able to contribute enough in such a short time, so are rendered totally ineligible...... That's just for the people that haven't heard this from me yet :P User:Fag/sig

Nom and For - he returned from a 7 month vacation on December 11th and started a good article so he technically counts as a n00b? Right? Also, he said he wouldn't turn down the nom--Æ 00:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

He hasn't really been around longer than a month. He truly became active in either late November or early December, and featured an article in a short time. He deserves it. Le Cejak•<->(Jan 3) 03:24

comment - You know, I only became active in quite late November, but I imagine no sober person would nominate me again. Actually, even I wouldn't nominate me again. I'm just not much of a noob, I'm more an evil writer/mega whore. Rofl. --Major'GUN'Ggarfield,Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 03:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

To say that I "contributed" back then would be an understatement. Sure, I rewrote the whole damn article on pancakes (and it still sucks), but the real question is what have I really done for Unc from that date? Any features? No Any pees? No Did I talk to any other users? No. All this happened 5 months later, in late november when my real noobship began, and I decided I liked Unc enough, that I asked leddy to adopt me. Soon after, BAM! my first feature the day after christmas, and a whole bunch of "Quality" reviews as per Cajeks standards. Not to rant on any more, but I digest, but isn't being in AAN automatically qualify me for NOTM? I mean AAN=Noob and NotM=Noob, so why can't I be a noob? What if someone came in here from ED and hit the ground running? Is he still a noob even though he clearly knows what he has to do to succeed? You should really look into deeper things instead of age based on first contributions, such as how nooby were they? Think about it.--SirUnknownUser(Talk:Cont:VFH:PEE:CUN) 20:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

First off, being in Adopt-a-Noob doesn't mean you can become Noob of the Month. NotM has age restrictions because being a noob is all up to personal interpretation. I've been around since August, but I still hardly do a damn thing around here. Five months later, I wouldn't be surprised if some (or many) people still consider me to be a noob. However, there is probably not a single person on this site that would even consider allowing me to be eligible for this award. What's more, I registered in March. So, like you, I registered, had a long period of inactivity, and came back. There have to be set restrictions, or every other month this award would turn into a flamewar over some newbie that thinks they deserve the award, while everybody else argues that they don't. Happy New Years! Shouldn't I be partying? PEEING 21:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That being said, let's not turn this into a flamewar over some newbie that thinks they deserve the award while everyone else argues that they don't. NEXT CONTESTANT! --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, I wouldn't turn down another NotM myself. Think about it. I've done almost nothing for the site since September-ish, then BAM! I'm active again! That qualifies for being a noob, right? right?! -RAHB 21:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Against - And please make it a bannable offence if you nominate this guy. --AAA!(AAAA) 08:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

For And please make it a bannable offense if you vote against this guy -RAHB21:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment I seem to be making a pretty good run at Noob of the Year, and if that works out I will probably retire from NotM consideration at least for the near future. This does not preclude a 2009 Comeback Tour, mind. —rc(t) 23:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment that's not a spiteful thing, I'm annoyed ywr being nominated all the time for NotM even though there are thoroughly decent actual n00bs nominated each month. I voted for yew on NotY just to prove that point :P User:Fag/sig

Nom. I'd like to call Mr. Charitwo, "the silent reverter". Even though the guy stays under the radar, if you check his contributions you can see that he is just about anywhere, boldly fighting vandals, spammers and blankers. Just to show that his efforts has not gone unnoticed. ~ Mordillo where is my DAMN IT? 12:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For - I've seen him a lot on recent changes reverting vandalism and doing useful things. Now he shall go noticed--Æ 12:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For! It was hard to decided between him and Techno, but Charitwo's beaten me to too many reverts recently not to vote for him. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 18:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For If just on IRC vigilance alone, he's got most beat. All the time, I'm on minding my own business and he's like "Lj, this is going on. Lj, that's going on. Lj, vandal breakout." Fun, t'is.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 02:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Nom. Our friend JT, is one of the friendliest users around. Always helping, making suggestions and smiling crookedly all over the place. And he's a rabbi. What more can one ask for? ~ Mordillo where is my DAMN IT? 12:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

For I introduced him to this place and then sat back and watched while he contributed far more than I'm ever likely to. Besides, the poor guy needs something to cheer him up at the moment (see his userpage). Juan Kerr 19:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment Not for nothing, but virtually none of those edits have been "keeping this place tidy" edits. Several could have been condensed using the preview button as well. This isn't to take away from Cajek (substantially), but the facts should be known.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 02:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Seriously most of those edits were before I understood the pervwei button. oh shit ...uh anyways, don't vote for me. Thank you so much, Cs1987, but I really don't deserve this! Le Cejak•<->Jan 5 (08:57)

Nom. At the time of this nom, this user had been a member for less than 24 hours. Take a look at her userpage, and contributions. She has joined the proofreading service, started using the Poopsmith lounge, and shown an ability to learn ridiculously quickly. Watch this space... MrNFork you!03:05, Feb 17

Comment on previous comment - Previous comment is presumably in fact a "for", and should be taken into count as such. And no, I am not voting for myself. Yet. ;) ---- DameViktoria-(Contribs)-(Talk)-(Block log) 11:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Nom+Dig The kid is definitely on his way. He did a great job with Atlanta and is now onto an UnScript that made me laugh. Got nommed last month and didn't make it, so here's the second bid. --THINKER 19:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

For I would like to vote for rcmurphy. Not for his contributions which frankly I can't be bothered to read but because of examples of his fine work on Uncyc QDB. Comedy gold...seriously. --Sean.hoyland - tak() 01:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

For, KoShare alone makes him deserving of this award, and if you read Modusoperani's list, and add it to mine, I, for one, see that Mordillo is the most deservingful. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 17:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

For. He's one of those people who's been having it coming, but don't write 15 articles per month, so their winnage isn't extremely evident. Makes me wish that Winstanley still wrote, though. Whatever the case, Mickey is a winner, and deserves this muchly. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 00:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

For. I think the biggest testimony to the quality of Mickey's work is that I'm prepared to vote for him ahead of Mordillo. That surprised me, but Mickey deserves this. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 22:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Strong for. He's consistently innovative and it appears he doesn't write anything unless it truly adds something new to the site. Also, I think the concept of UnCameron subconsciously inspired several of my articles. --So So 15:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Nom & For . I saw this guy a few weeks ago on recentchanges adding categories to images. Then I saw him the next day, and the next, so I decided to check his contributions. I saw a trend spanning months that contained heavy maintenance to improve the site, much like what MadMax is famous for. If you haven't seen him around, check his contributions to see what I'm talking about. Sure, he's not a "publicly known" user, but his contributions speak for themselves. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

N♥m && f♥r. My new favorite noob. He's so helpful over at Pee Reviews, writes some great articles, (one of which is up at VFH) and is active all over the site. I don't see there being any other choice. ~MinitrueSirSysRq!Talk!Sex!=/GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 18:20 Mar 1

DIG When I respect a man's vocabulary, I think that speaks volumes. Oh, and he's another one of THINKER's n00b army, and I only take the best and brightest. Vote for this gentleman. --THINKER 16:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Nom Since he's been back, he has fast gotten back into the groove, QVFDing pages just as fast as I can delete them. On for a solid amount of time every day, he's a keeper too.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 21:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

N♥m && f♥r. Didn't win it last month, here's to another shot. Only reason I didn't vote for him last month was because that Hebrew was up. I hope UU wins this month, he's extremely helpful around the site, and he really stepped up to the plate with Pee Reviews after Cajek's mysterious disappearance. ~MinitrueSirSysRq!Talk!Sex!=/GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 18:07 Mar 1

For/me Snowboards into the voting.. UU is one of the most useful and probably the most friendly and courteous chap it's been my fortune to encounter at Uncyc. Following on from the sudden __NOCAJEK__, and my switch to the more poopy end of the market, he has been holding the fort at Pee Review, as well as providing useful input all over the place. Some of his comments in the forums genuinely make me laugh out loud, and why he does not write more I have no Idea. MrNFork you!13:44, Mar 2

FOR Very helpful pee reviews, genuinely friendly, and easy to work with. I vote for UNDER USER!!! Javascap 14:58, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Strong For Extra special, totally delicious, and absolutely British. All three things that I don't dislike. Plus the fact that he's a really useful helper to have around, always been a better poopsmith than me. In short, he makes most of us look bad. That's why he's got my vote.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 21:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

EPIC for as per every time I've ever voted for him on anything. --User:Fag/sig2 22:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

For, I remember the first time he asked me if I could give him a job as my personal butler. Then he picked up some kind of shovel, and started doing something to VFD. I'm not really sure what I'm talking about here, but, rest assured, its probably a metaphor. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 19:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

He really oughta have his own forum-category (Category:CaSAIP?). We should also put spaces before all our question marks, in his honor. (See what I mean ? ) - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs)21:10, Mar 11

For. As much as I want to vote for my ailing self out of self-pity, I also promised last month. This vote ought to end that whole "promised last month" brigade. --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 21:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Super Dooper Strong For Boy is this man good at writing and admining-ing. I promised last month so... --SirDJ~Irreverent 03:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment If Dr. S had not been nominated, then I would definitely vote for TKF. TKF nommed me in... whenever, and is also a prolific writer. I hope I get the chance to vote for him before he gets it! Le Cejak•<Apr 01, 2008 [3:45]>

For. Another really tough choice this month, and I certainly wouldn't object if Skullthumper won this. But my vote goes to TKF, partly because he's been unlucky to miss out several times now, partly because of someawesomearticles, and partly because of his eyes. They're so deep and soulful. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee14:35, Apr 1

Having done about a bazillion Pees for him last month, and with all of those articles being brilliant, strong for. His earlier articles speak for themsleves really. Also, as per last month. –—Hv(talk)1/04 18:53

Not a no, not a yes As the good Cap'n knows, I greatly admire his work. However, as long as there are fresh nominees to win the award (which there are), it should go to them.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 21:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination, Froggy, but after thinking about this, I'm with Ljlego. While it would be nice to win now that there are more than three people voting, it's probably better that someone else has a go. I'm not sure if I can withdraw from the running, but if I can then I do. --Cap'n Sir BenGUNWotMVFHVFP 02:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nomination. Also one of my favorite writers, whom I've been watching since his very first stellar creation Kitchen Sink, a feature he whipped up as his first contribution. Sadly, due to inactivity, he has been unable to rightfully claim this award, but fear not! for he has started writing again, and with his reemergence of activity comes this nomination. Keep on truckin' Dr. S! --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 01:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Skullthumper is consistently funny. A dynamic sense of humor and a good personality set Skull up for a big win come November May. Le Cejak•<Apr 01, 2008 [1:51]>

For He wrote the "Best article I've ever read." Seriously, Dr. S, I made that T-shirt I said I was going to make. It says "Vote For Monotony." It's not even up for any sort of voting anymore. On a side note, Dr. S consistently puts out hilarious stuff. On a side side note, TKF really should get this award. But Dr. S is edging him out in my personal preference for now. -RAHB 06:29, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Uh oh... believe it or not, but looking back into this guy's contribs, his first contrib was from February 26th. He's ineligible! --T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 17:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

IT TOOK YOU THIS LONG TO TELL US THAT?! Fuck, I don't care. I move to a motion that he be eligible anyways since he's already gotten so many votes. The point of NotM is not how well known you are in the first month of your Uncyc career, it's more about any new user who is helpful and I think YTTE deserves better than to have this taken away from him. He's done a bang-up job, and in my opinion is one of the more impressive noobs I've seen. Let's not ruin this for him, yeh? One exception couldn't hurt. ~MinitrueSirSysRq!Talk!Sex!=/GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 17:45 Apr 26

It would hurt, any exception would allow anyone to win n00b of the month and automaticly become comander. Except for Rcmurphy. Besides, YesTimeToEdit can win many more awards such as UOTM and WOTM, so it ain't the end of the world. And if he's been here for say, two or three months. He certainly has experience. That's why I care. --User:The Improver/sig18:40, Apr 26 2008 (UTC)

I agree with both of you. But unless we make the time limit 2 months (which I would definitely agree with), there can only be one winner. This has happened before: two good contenders both deserving of the award. Let's give it to both of them. Le Cejak•<Apr 26, 2008 [18:59]>

Well, sort of. There was before your vote. You should have changed it to a 5, I've changed it to a 6 - it's a zany way of doing the scoring. Woo! --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee12:46, Apr 2

For, for taking the time to say hi to me, and being the first person to whore themselves on my talkpage. ☯ 21:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to keep commenting/talking here but I just have to say this relating to whoring on your talkpage: cough, splutter, pah, ahem, splutter some more, ME? Now I promise to myself that I will never talk on here again! - 10:55 4 AprilSirFSt.(QotFBFFNotM)YTTETalk!Read!Sign!Whore!CMC!Pee!

For He's amazing (he didn't tell me to say that). For NOT splitting my kneecaps, and because he likes cheese, the other yellow meat (he does, he really does). This man truly deserves to be N00blet of the Month! --Stattalk 00:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Vicarious For Since I'll never have the chance to be NotM, I'll vote for this guy. Not just because he's the best choice, but mainly because he's the only choice. Plus he owes me $20. -OptyCSucks! CUN 00:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)